
Web Release Date: June 23,
Chiroselective Self-Directed Octamerization of Serine: Implications for Homochirogenesis
Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
Institute of Chemistry, State University of Campinas, CP 6154 Campinas SP 13083-970, Brazil
Received for review March 12, 2001. Accepted May 16, 2001.
Abstract:
Serine undergoes chiroselective self-directed oligomerization to form a singly protonated octamer under positive ion electrospray conditions, as identified by ion trap tandem mass spectrometry. The experiments also show a series of higher-order clusters (metaclusters) corresponding to [(Ser8H)n]n+, n = 1, 2, 3. There is a magic number effect favoring formation of the protonated octamer over its homologues and also a strong preference for octamer formation from homochiral serine molecules. Collision-induced dissociation suggests that the protonated octamer is composed of four hydrogen-bonded dimers, stabilized by further extensive hydrogen bonding. Density functional calculations support this model and show that the protonated homochiral octamer is energetically stabilized relative to its possible fragments (dimer plus protonated hexamer, etc). The calculations also show that heterochiral octamers are less stable than homochiral octamers (e.g., the protonated 7:1 cluster is 2.1 kcal/mol less stable than the 8:0 analogue). The implications of these results for the origin of homochirality are discussed.
Three key steps can be distinguished along the pathway that
led to living organisms: (i) the formation of organic molecules
from inorganic compounds, (ii) a symmetry-breaking step or
symmetry-transfer step needed to generate homochiral organic
compounds,1,2
This study deals with the clustering of the primitive amino
acid serine, and the chiral-selective formation of its stable
octamer-an instance of homochiral assembly.
The experimental results reported here have been presented
in preliminary form,15 although the structural interpretation has
been changed. This study forms part of a larger scale investigation
of clustering of amino acids using electrospray ionization, based
on the expectation that clustering can be facilitated in the highly
concentrated solutions encountered during the evaporation of
microdroplets in ESI. The first finding of this series of studies
was that arginine forms particularly stable singly protonated
tetramers and doubly protonated 12-mer clusters, suggested to
be structural analogues of 3 × 3 × 1 and 3 × 3 × 3 salt
microcrystallites.16 In addition, phenylalanine shows a doubly
protonated 11-mer and glutaric and aspartic acid form doubly,
triply, and quadruply deprotonated clusters.15 There is strong
current interest in several groups in the use of ESI to generate
and study cluster ions of biological significance.17-20
All experiments were performed using a Finnigan LCQ
(ThermoFinnigan, San Jose, CA) ion trap mass spectrometer,
equipped with an electrospray ionization source and a syringe
pump. Operating conditions were spray voltage 4.5 kV, capillary
voltage 3.0 V, heated capillary temperature 160
C, nitrogen sheath
gas 0.75 L/min (1.05 L/min for loop injection), with no auxiliary
gas (1.5 L/min for loop injection). The samples were either
directly infused using the syringe pump at a flow rate of 1
L/min or introduced via a 5-
L injection loop with a mobile-phase
flow rate of 0.2 mL/min using a Bioanalytical Systems (West
Lafayette, IN) HPLC pump. Samples were examined in both
positive and negative ion modes. Data are presented in thomson
(Th): 1 Th = 1 dalton/unit charge.24
Charge states of cluster ions were determined by mass/charge ratio measurements and confirmed by higher resolution experiments and tandem mass spectrometry. Isolation of the ions of interest was achieved using a notched waveform to effect broadband excitation and ejection of the undesirable ions. Dissociation of precursor ions was achieved through collisional activation of the isolated cluster ions by collisions with helium buffer gas in the ion trap. The collision energy is optimized for each experiment and expressed in terms of the manufacturer's nominal relative collision energy (%), where the range from 0 to 100% corresponds to a resonance excitation ac signal of 5 V (peak to peak) at the secular frequency of the ion of interest. Spectra shown represent an average of at least 20 scans. Higher resolution was achieved by scanning at a slower rate (1/20 the normal scan rate), a standard method employed in ion trap mass spectrometry.25
Serine (D, L, DL), threonine (D, L, DL), cysteine (D, L, DL), (S)-(+)-2-aminobutyric acid, and (R)-(-)-2-amino-1-propanol were all
2, 6, 7, 3, 4, 5, and 9. Odd-n clusters were
always much less abundant than their even-n counterparts.
All calculations were performed without constraints on structure using the GAMESS program.26 The maximum and rms gradient values were set to 0.0003 and 0.0001, respectively, due to the floppy nature of the species calculated. The structures were visualized using the Molden program.27
The mass spectrum of a 10-2 M L-serine solution, recorded by
positive ion electrospray ionization, is shown in Figure 1. It is
obvious that the protonated serine octamer, [(Ser)8 + H]+, is a
magic number cluster, by virtue of its large relative abundance.
No other magic number cluster is observed at higher mass (up
to cluster size 18), and the magic number effect, expressed using
the scaling factor,28 (2 × In)/(In-1 + In+1), where I represents
signal intensity, is >20. This large value indicates that this cluster
has greatly enhanced stability over neighboring clusters. The
dimer is also relatively stable. Under different experimental
conditions which transfer more internal energy, minor ion series
are observed corresponding to the singly protonated serine
clusters, [(Ser)n + H]+, where n represents the number of serine
molecules in the cluster, as well as sodiated serine clusters and
doubly protonated clusters (Table 1
).
The protonated L-serine cluster ion was examined by tandem
mass spectrometry to obtain structural (connectivity) information
from its dissociation behavior. Since the ion might be loosely
bound, isolation efficiencies of the protonated serine clusters were
first investigated in the absence of collision-induced dissociation.
These efficiencies should provide an indication of the relative
stability of the selected ions, as shown in previous work on sodium
chloride and arginine clusters.16,29 Using a large (20 Th) isolation
window, it was observed that only the protonated dimer and
protonated octamer could be efficiently isolated. The other
clusters, although present in the mass spectrum, are apparently
Collision energy-dependent fragmentation of the protonated L-serine octamer is displayed in Figure 3a. This breakdown curve shows that dimer loss is the lowest energy and the most significant channel of dissociation across the collision energy range examined and that loss of odd-number monomer molecules is not favored. This result suggests that the dimer is likely a stable building unit of the octamer and that internal bonding in the dimer must be relatively strong. A further stage of mass selection, dissociation, and mass analysis (MS3 experiment), carried out on the major dissociation product of the octamer, the protonated hexamer, shows that it too preferentially loses a dimer upon dissociation to yield the protonated tetramer (Figure 3b). These MS3 results again suggest that the octamer is composed of four dimeric units. Since symmetrical structures are often characteristic of magic number clusters, the protonated octamer is most likely a symmetrical structure. Note that serine has three functional groups that could serve as either hydrogen bond donors or acceptors and it is likely that hydrogen bond networks are responsible for the exceptional stability of the octamer in the gas phase.
The most interesting discovery about the protonated octamer is its chiral dependence: the relative abundance of the protonated serine octamer depends on the enantiomeric composition of the sample being electrosprayed (at constant total serine concentration). The octamer from D-serine shows the same magic number factor (~20) as that for L-serine, but under identical conditions, the protonated octamer was not observed in significant abundance from the racemic serine solution. The mass spectra recorded for solutions of pure L- and pure D-serine are identical (compare Figure 1) while the racemate showed little preference for octamer formation (e.g., octamer/hexamer ratio was >50 for D-serine, >50 for L-serine, but only 3 in the racemic mixture). The strong preference of the protonated octamer to be composed of monomers of identical chirality implies that monomers of the same configuration bond favorably. Note that no such preference exists for the dimer (m/z 211), for which the observed relative abundance is independent of the enantiomeric composition of the sample. The protonated serine clusters (n = 4 and n = 6) show the same behavior as the dimer although the results are not shown explicitly.
To further characterize the protonated serine octamer, the effect of the enantiomeric composition of the serine solution on cluster formation was investigated. The results from this study are shown in Figure 4, where the signal due to the protonated octamer is plotted as a function of the enantiomeric composition of the serine sample. The chiral dependence of octamer formation is clearly evident from this plot, which is discussed further below. In contrast to the chiral dependence shown by the octamer, the abundance of the protonated hexamer shows no chiral dependence-its abundance relative to that of the octamer generated from L-serine is approximately constant, varying within 6% of the average value. In addition, signals due to other clusters are unaffected by enantiomeric composition.
If one assumes that the octamers are randomly constructed by assembling individual amino acids but that only homochiral (all-L and all-D) serine octamers are stable, comparisons of predicted and experimental clustering behavior are possible. The chirality-dependent serine distribution predicted for the protonated octamer is plotted against the enantiomeric composition of the sample in Figure 4. The calculated data are normalized to the average abundances of the pure D- and L-serine protonated octamers. The shapes of both curves agree, and this constitutes good evidence that there is a strong preference for formation of the homochiral octameric clusters. However, the experimental and calculated results clearly differ and these differences are most marked when the composition of the sample approaches the racemate. One possible reason is that there are contributions from ions of m/z 841 other than the protonated octamer and these contributions account for the elevated abundance at m/z 841 when the sample is not enantiomerically pure. Interferences are not unexpected since the predicted abundance of the homochiral octamer at this composition (the pure racemate) is <1%. Interfering ions do exist and are due in part to multiply protonated clusters as discussed further below.
Because of Coulombic repulsion, multiply charged clusters are often inherently less stable than singly charged clusters and this fact can be used to differentiate the multiply charged from the singly charged species. As demonstrated in previous work,30 the isolation window used in the ion trap provides a means to effect this discrimination. Hence, the effect of enantiomeric composition was reexamined by recording the abundance of the protonated cluster ion at m/z 841 using different isolation widths (10 and 20 Th) for comparison with the full mass spectrum. The results are shown in Figure 4, along with those obtained from the conventional mass spectrum and the binomial prediction. Direct evidence for a doubly charged ion contribution was obtained by comparing the isotopic peaks associated with different window widths: a peak at m/z 841.5 is detected in the 20 Th window experiment but not in the 10 Th experiment. It is also obvious that a narrower isolation width causes the experimental distribution to match the prediction more closely. In other words, the data obtained from the mass spectra appear to represent a limit where the ions of m/z 841 are composed of clusters of a number of different charge states and narrower isolation widths exclude most multiply charged cluster ions or other less stable ions of m/z 841. As shown in the next section, the additional contributions to the abundance of the protonated octamer in the optically impure samples include contributions from the mixed clusters (e.g., protonated D-Ser7:L-Ser1) as well as the multiply charged serine clusters.
Test of Cluster Structure Using Isotopic and Chiral
Labeling. An apparently straightforward test of the homochirality
of the octameric cluster is to isotopically label either the D- or the
L-amino acid and to look for the characteristic signatures of the
two separate homochiral compounds. This experiment was
performed using [13C1]-L-serine, labeled at the carboxylate carbon,
but the very low abundance predicted by the binary theorem for
the singly charged homooctamer meant that it was not possible
to recognize the 1:1 homochiral 13C8 and 13C0 octamers. The
magnitude of the interference is evident in the mass spectrum of
a 1:1 mixture of D-serine and 13C-labeled L-serine, shown in Figure
5. The contributions from doubly and triply charged ions (charge
states are indicted as n, m, and l for the singly, doubly, and triply
charged series, respectively) are evident. The widths of the
isotopic peaks in this spectrum confirm the assignments shown:
the isotopic envelopes for the doubly and triply charged ions are
half and a third as wide as those for the singly charged ions. Even
more direct evidence for the contributions of the mixed clusters
comes from careful measurements of ion abundances in the
molecular ion region of the protonated octamer. A 7:1 mixture of
D-serine and [13C]-L-serine and a 7:1 mixture of [13C]-L-serine and
-D-serine shows the abundances given in Table 2
. These data,
including the enhanced abundances of the M+1 ions compared
to the expected 30% value for the natural 13C contribution, clearly
demonstrate (i) that the homochiral octamer is more stable than
the heterochiral octamer and (ii) that the 7:1 heterocluster is
generated in measurable abundance.
In principle, another form of labeling for chirality is possible: one can examine a mixture of serine and an analogue. When a L-serine/L-homoserine mixture is examined, the protonated octamer is formed in 5 times greater abundance relative to the higher homologue of the cluster (m/z 841 vs 855) than from D-serine/L-homoserine examined under identical conditions. This result, which will be presented in detail elsewhere,31 confirms that the homocluster is more stable than the heterocluster. Taken together with the earlier results shown in this section, it also confirms that the deviation between experiment and calculation in Figure 4 is due to both mixed clusters and multiply charged clusters. The result also suggests a mechanism of transfer of chirality from serine to other amino acids.
The noncovalent serine octamer is generated in an aqueous environment, and although the exact site of formation of the octamer is not known, gas-phase clustering is extremely unlikely, while the linear dependence of the cluster ion abundance on serine concentration in solution suggests that its formation takes place in the microdroplets generated during electospray. This raises the question of how serine, which exists as the zwitterionic form in aqueous solution,32 is converted into the neutral form in the gas-phase octamer. Thermodynamically, we calculate that neutral serine is more stable than zwitterionic serine by 24 kcal/mol while the neutral dimer is 37 kcal/mol more stable than the zwitterionic dimer. This suggests that the neutral form is increasingly favored as the concentration of water is reduced in the evaporating microdroplets. In fact, there is evidence that the transition in stability from the zwitterionic form of the monomer to the neutral form has a low barrier and that the latter is the absolute energy minimum.32
Ab Initio Calculations. A systematic investigation of the clusters of serine was carried out theoretically, including various cluster sizes, the protonated and neutral clusters, and chirally homo- as well as heterogeneous clusters.
To evaluate the forces involved in the serine clusters,33 three
dimers representing the hydrogen bonds possibly involved in the
serine clusters were examined (Chart 1
). Note that the zwitterionic
dimer is not included, since it was found to be >30 kcal/mol less
stable than these forms. The calculations (Table 3) show that the
most favorable interaction is between the carboxyl groups (COOH,
dimer 1), followed by those involving NH2/OH and COOH groups
(dimer 3) and then those involving OH and NH2 groups (dimer
2). The results in Table 3 also show that, despite the lack of
polarization functions, the HF/6-31G relative energies are in
agreement with those of higher level calculations, making the HF/6-31G a relatively inexpensive but reliable level for the large
systems investigated herein. The type of hydrogen bond shown
as dimer 1 has been observed in acetic acid vapors.34,35
, including the proposed drum-shaped protonated octamer
(Figure 6).
On the basis of these results, relative energies of possible
configurations containing eight serine molecules and one proton
were calculated (Table 5
). Note that all configurations in Table 5,
except the one composed of three neutral dimers and a protonated
dimer, have 16 hydrogen bonds-eight between COOH groups
and eight between NH2 and OH groups. The higher stability of
the protonated octamer is due to a better spatial arrangement that
yields stronger hydrogen bonds. The proposed octamer structure
is also in agreement with the experimental results on D- and
L-serine. For instance, the calculations show that the replacement
of one serine in a homochiral octamer by its enantiomer weakens
at least one NH2/OH hydrogen bond, increasing the energy of
the system by 2.1 kcal/mol.
The closed, symmetrical structure of the octamer also provides an explanation for the virtual absence of higher singly charged homologues in the ESI spectrum; the addition of an extra dimer to the octamer breaks the alignment of the NH2 and OH groups making their hydrogen bonds weaker. The octamer structure is also consistent with its magic number behavior.
The formation of the higher charge-state clusters [(Ser)16 + 2H]2+ and [(Ser)24 + 3H]3+ is also possible from the proposed octamer structure, since additional NH2/OH hydrogen bonds can be formed between the "faces" of two octamers. Evidence for this will be presented elsewhere,31 as will evidence for mixed clusters in which one or two molecules of other amino acids substitute for serine in the octamers.23
Multiply Charged Clusters of Serine. To investigate further the multiply charged metaclusters suggested to be present by the isolation and high-sensitivity studies summarized in Figures 4 and 5 and discussed above, the dissociation behavior of the mass-selected clusters at m/z 841, especially that formed from racemic serine, was examined. The product ion spectrum of the mass-selected protonated octamer, generated from a sample of racemic serine and selected using an isolation width of 20 Th, is shown in Figure 7. This figure demonstrates that a significant fraction of the signal recorded under these gentle isolation conditions is due to doubly or triply protonated serine clusters. The product ions having even higher m/z than the parent ion must arise by charge separation dissociations of multiply charged ions of 841 Th. The m/z values of all the product ions observed indicate that they are composed of serine molecules only. The lower m/z ions include some due apparently to the loss of half or one-third of the mass of serine, proving the presence of doubly and triply protonated serine clusters of formulas [(Ser)16 + 2H]2+ and [(Ser)24 + 3H]3+ in the selected parent ion population. Comparison of these data with those of Figure 5 make it clear that a variety of doubly and triply charged cluster ions occur.
Clustering of Related Compounds. Experiments were carried out to characterize the underlying structural factors leading to the formation of the protonated serine octamer. Using identical conditions, the structurally related amino acids threonine and cysteine, which differ from serine by an additional CH2 unit and the substitution of an SH by OH, respectively, as well as (S)-(+)-2-aminobutyric acid and (R)-(-)-2-amino-1-propanol, were examined. None of these compounds except cysteine, which gives a hexamer, showed clusters other than the dimer in their ESI mass spectra. The reasons for this might be complex: for example, the CH3 group in threonine can impose steric constraints. Similarly, the SH group in cysteine is not as a good proton donor as the OH group, while both aminobutyric acid and aminopropanol have fewer hydrogen bond donors or acceptors than serine and so their clusters would have fewer or weaker hydrogen bonds. These results support the proposed structure of the serine octamer in which all three functional groups play important roles in stabilizing the structure. It has already been noted that magic number clusters are observed in some other amino acids, including n = 4 for arginine16 and m = 11 for phenylalanine,15 although the structure of the phenylalanine cluster has not been elucidated. However, none of these clusters shows a dependence on the enantiomeric composition as large as that seen in serine.
In contrast to the positive ion results, examination of serine in the negative ion electrospray mode displayed signals due to the deprotonated monomer and dimer but failed to yield the corresponding deprotonated serine octamer. Attempts to generate clusters using cations other than the proton gave sodium and potassium cationized octamers as well as the corresponding doubly and, in the case of sodium, triply charged ions.23 These ions were present as magic number peaks; e.g., when serine was examined from an aqueous alcohol solution containing 10-4 M sodium chloride, the major ions in the mass spectrum corresponded to the sodiated and protonated forms of the monomeric, dimeric, and octameric ions.
Implications for Homochirality in Living Systems. There
is a consensus that homochirality of the essential biomolecules36,37
Several feasible physical processes, for example, enantioselective photolysis by circularly polarized light46-48
The discovery of the serine octamer may have implications for the evolution of homochirality. First, the octameric cluster adopts a chirality that is dependent on that of the monomeric amino acid, serine. A prior example of symmetry breaking at the supramolecular level50 is the transfer of chirality from a chiral barbiturate to a noncovalent assembly of nonchiral molecules and subsequent "chiral memory" retention after removal of the barbiturate. Second, and more importantly, the present results make it is possible to consider new mechanisms for symmetry breaking that operate at the molecular cluster level, rather than at the individual molecule level. Both evolutionary and spontaneous mechanisms might operate at this level and they might involve lower energy and hence more likely processes. As one posssible example, chiroselectivity might occur during the formation of the serine octamers and symmetry breaking might be a consequence of a Zeeman effect on the bending deformation required to complete the construction of the octamer by hydrogen bonding in the upper or lower rings of the structure shown in Figure 6. An example of the spontaneous mechanism that is worthy of further testing is that a serine or serine octamer of appropriate chirality is selectively adsorbed onto the chiral surface of a naturally chiral mineral, specifically quartz or calcite. Asymmetric adsorption onto quartz and clays has long been known.2 The selective absorption of the serine organic cluster onto a chiral inorganic surface may represent the symmetry-transfer (rather than symmetry-breaking) step needed to convert chirality from the inorganic to the organic and subsequently the biological world.
The proposal that chirogenesis is associated with supramolecular clusters, together with the fact that one or two serine molecules in the octameric cluster can be substituted by other molecules to generate new mixed octameric clusters,31 provides a mechanism for transmission of chirality between different amino acids.
An unusually strong magic number cluster of serine, observed as the protonated or sodiated or potassiated octamer, is identified using electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. The effect of enantiomeric composition demonstrates that the octamer is preferentially homochiral in nature, and tandem mass spectrometry results suggest-and ab initio calculations support-the fact that the octamer is composed of four dimeric units. The individual dimers are bound through the carboxylic acid groups while additional hydrogen bonding involving the hydroxyl and amino groups generates the final drum-shaped structure. The lowest energy forms of the neutral and protonated octamers are suggested to be homochiral structures consisting of four dimers stabilized by hydrogen-bonding networks. Furthermore, the calculations show that protonation is not important in binding the four dimeric constituents of the octamer together; viz., [(Ser)8 + H]+ is simply a surrogate for the neutral cluster [(Ser)8].
The magic number effects show that clustering reflects the influence of the thermochemistry, although the mixture experiments indicate that full thermodynamic equilibrium is not achieved in the time available. Otherwise, homochiral octamers would have been observed, even from racemic serine. It is interesting to estimate the equilibrium constant for interconversion between the hetero 7:1 and the homo 8:0 forms of the protonated octamer: assuming that the calculated energy difference (2.1 kcal/mol) is also the free energy difference, and a temperature of 300 K, the value is 34. This number should be compared to the ratio of ~2 observed from the mass spectra of a sample of a 7:1 mixture of D-serine and 13C1-labeled L-serine, which is summarized in Table 2. The experiment clearly occurs under kinetic control.
The spontaneous formation of chiral supramolecular clusters
may have implications for the evolution of homochirality of amino
acids in living organisms, a topic that has been debated in recent
years.38,49,51,52
This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, and by the National Science Foundation, Grant CHE 97-32670. Research support from the State of São Paulo (FAPESP), Brazil, is also gratefully acknowledged. We acknowledge helpful discussions with Peter D. Thomas, John B. Grutzner, and Ed R. Grant and thank Jack L. Beauchamp and David E. Clemmer for communicating their results prior to publication. D.Z. thanks Merck & Co. for fellowship support.
* Corresponding author: (tel) (765) 494-5262; (fax) (765) 494-9421; (e-mail) cooks@purdue.edu.
1. Berger, R.; Quack, M. Chem.. Phys. Chem. 2000, 1, 57-60.![]()
2. Bonner, W. A. AIP Conf. Proc. 1996, 379, 17-49.![]()
3. Schalley, C. A. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 2000, 194, 11-39.![]()
4. Lehn, J.-M. Supramolecular Chemistry: Concepts and Pespectives; VCH: Weinheim, 1995.
5. Miller, S. L.; Orgel, L. E. The Origins of Life on the Earth; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1974.
6. Lederberg, J. Nature 1965, 207, 9.![]()
7. Siegel, J. S. Supramolecular Stereochemistry; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1995.
8. Fenn, J. B.; Mann, M.; Meng, C. K.; Wong, S. F.; Whitehouse, C. M. Science
1989, 246, 64-71.![]()
9. Busch, K. L.; Glish, G. L.; McLuckey, S. A. Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry: Techniques and Applications of Tandem Mass Spectrometry; VCH Publishers: New York, 1988.
10. Julian, R. R.; Hodyss, R.; Beauchamp, J. L. Personal communciation, April 2001.
11. Counterman, A. E.; Valentine, S. J.; Srebalus, C. A.; Henderson, S. C.;
Hoaglund, C. S.; Clemmer, D. E. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 1998, 9, 743-759.![]()
12. Schell, M. J.; Molliver, M. E.; Snyder, S. H. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
1995, 92, 3948-3952.![]()
13. Wolosker, H.; Blackshaw, S.; Snyder, S. H. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
1999, 96, 13409-13414.![]()
14. Brennan, M. Chem. Eng. News 1999, 77 (46), 9-10.
15. Zhang, D.; Koch, K. J.; Tao, W. A.; Cooks, R. G., Proc. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom., Long Beach, CA, 2000.
16. Zhang, D.; Wu, L.; Koch, K. J.; Cooks, R. G. Eur. Mass Spectrom. 1999, 5,
353-361.![]()
17. Rodriguez-Cruz, S. E.; Klassen, J. S.; Williams, E. R. J. Am. Soc. Mass
Spectrom. 1997, 8, 565-568.![]()
18. Lee, S. W.; Freivogel, P.; Schindler, T.; Beauchamp, J. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
1998, 120, 11758-11765.![]()
19. Nikolaev, E. N.; Denisov, E. V.; Rakov, V. S.; Futrell, J. H. Int. J. Mass
Spectrom. 1999, 182/183, 357-368.![]()
20. Hofstadler, S. A.; Griffey, R. H. Chem. Rev. 2001, 101, 377-390.![]()
21. Hodyss, R.; Julian, R. R.; Beauchamp, J. L. Chirality, submitted for publication.
22. Counterman, A.; Clemmer, D. E. Personal communication, April 2001.
23. Koch, K.; Gozzo, F.; Zhang, D.; Eberlin, M. N.; Cooks, R. G. Chem. Commun. Submitted.
24. Cooks, R. G.; Rockwood, A. L. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 1991, 5,
93.![]()
25. Schwartz, J. C.; Syka, J. E. P.; Jardine, I. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 1991,
2, 198-204.![]()
26. Schmidt, M. W.; Baldridge, K. K.; Boatz, J. A.; Elbert, S. T.; Gordon, M. S.;
Jensen, J. H.; Koseki, S.; Matsunaga, N.; Nguyen, K. A.; Su, S. J.; Windus,
T. L.; Dupuis, M.; Montgomery, J. A. J. Comput. Chem. 1993, 14, 1347-1363.![]()
27. Schaftenaar, G.; Noordik, J. H. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2000, 14, 123-134.![]()
28. Wong, S. S.; Rollgen, F. W. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. Ion Processes 1986, 70,
135-44.![]()
29. Zhang, D.; Cooks, R. G. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 2000, 195/196, 667-684.![]()
30. Louris, J. N.; Cooks, R. G.; Syka, J. E. P.; Kelley, P. E.; Stafford, G. C., Jr.;
Todd, J. F. J. Anal. Chem. 1987, 59, 1677.![]()
31. Koch, K. J.; Gozzo, F. C.; Eberlin, M. N.; Cooks, R. G., to be published.
32. Tortonda, F. R.; Silla, E.; Tunon, I.; Rinaldi, D.; Ruiz-Lopez, M. F. Theor.
Chem. Acc. 2000, 104, 89-95.![]()
33. Compare: Loo, J. A. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 2000, 200, 175-186.
34. Herman, R. C.; Hofstadter, R. J. Chem. Phys. 1938, 6, 534-540.
35. Taylor, M. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1951, 73, 315.![]()
36. Crick, F. Life itself; McDonald: London, 1981.
37. Gardner, M. The Ambidextrous Universe, 2nd ed.; Harmondsworth: New York, 1982.
38. Siegel, J. S. Chirality 1998, 10, 24-27.![]()
39. Meierhenrich, U.; Thiemann, W. H.-P.; Rosenbauer, H. Chirality 1999, 11,
575-582.![]()
40. Bonner, W. A. Origins Life Evol. Biosphere 1992, 21, 407-420.
41. Avetisov, V. A.; Goldanskii, V. I. Phys. Lett. A 1993, 172, 407-410.
42. Kondepudi, D. K.; Hall, J. K. Physica A 1992, 188, 113-119.![]()
43. Russell, K. C.; Lehn, J. M.; Kyritsakas, N.; DeCian, A.; Fischer, J. New J.
Chem. 1998, 22, 123-128.![]()
44. Norsten, T. B.; McDonald, R.; Branda, N. R. Chem. Commun. (Cambridge)
1999, 719-720.![]()
45. Popa, R. J. Mol. Evol. 1997, 44, 121-127.![]()
46. Le Bel, J. A. Bull. Soc. Chim. Fr. 1874, 22, 337-354.
47. van't Hoff, J. H. Arch. Neerl. Sci. Exactes Nat. 1874, 9, 445-454.
48. Flores, J. J.; Bonner, W. A.; Massey, G. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99,
3622-24.![]()
49. Rikken, G. L. J. A.; Raupach, E. Nature 2000, 405, 932-935.![]()
50. Prins, L. J.; De Jong, F.; Timmerman, P.; Reinhoudt, D. N. Nature 2000,
408, 181-184.![]()
51. Cronin, J. R.; Pizzarello, S. Adv. Space Res. 1999, 23, 293-299.![]()
52. Bonner, W. A.; Rubenstein, E.; Brown, G. S. Origins Life Evol. Biosphere
1999, 29, 329-332.![]()
53. Hazen, R. M.; Filley, T. R.; Goodfriend, G. A. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
2001, 98, 5487-5490.![]()
|
m/z |
cluster speciesc |
rel abund (%) |
|
106 |
[Ser + H]+ |
42 |
|
128 |
[Ser + Na]+ |
3 |
|
211 |
[(Ser)2 + H]+ |
68 |
|
233 |
[(Ser)2 + Na]+ |
12 |
|
316 |
[(Ser)3 + H]+ |
5 |
|
338 |
[(Ser)3 + Na]+ |
3 |
|
421 |
[(Ser)4 + H]+ |
8 |
|
443 |
[(Ser)4 + Na]+ |
6 |
|
526 |
[(Ser)5 + H]+ |
6 |
|
548 |
[(Ser)5 + Na]+ |
3 |
|
631 |
[(Ser)6 + H]+ |
18 |
|
653 |
[(Ser)6 + Na]+ |
5 |
|
736 |
[(Ser)7 + H]+ |
10 |
|
788 |
[(Ser)15 + 2H]+2 |
16 |
|
841 |
[(Ser)8 + H]+ |
100 |
|
894 |
[(Ser)17 + 2H]+2 |
11 |
|
946 |
[(Ser)9 + H]+ |
17 |
a Experimental conditions for this spectrum not identical to those used to record Figure 1.b Depending on the sodium cation content of the sample, sodiated cluster ions appear in greater or smaller relative abundance. Cluster species of higher m/z values than the octamer have much lower abundances in the mass spectrum and are not listed explicitly.c The assignments do not exclude the possibility of multiply charged species.
|
|
m/z (rel abund, %) |
|
D-serine/L-[13C1]serine (7:1) |
841 (100), 842 (77), 843 (43), 840 (12), 844 (11) |
|
|
849 (100), 848(73), 850 (17), 847 (16), 845 (7) |
|
dimer |
HF/6-31G (hartree) |
rel energy (kcal/mol) |
HF/6-31 g(d,p) (hartree) |
rel energy (kcal/mol) |
B3LYP/6-31 g(d,p) (hartree) |
rel energy (kcal/mol) |
|
1 |
-793.101 412 |
0 |
-793.503 865 |
0 |
-797.964 902 |
0 |
|
2 |
-793.091 648 |
6.1 |
-793.492 228 |
7.2 |
-797.976 225 |
7.1 |
|
3 |
-793.091 884 |
5.9 |
-793.496 483 |
4.6 |
-797.957 586 |
4.5 |
a The zwitterionic dimer is 37 kcal/mol less stable than dimer 1 so is not considered further.
|
species |
electronic energy (hartree) |
|
dimer 1 |
-793.101 412 358 |
|
N atom-protonated dimer 1 |
-793.480 619 570 |
|
tetramer |
-1586.221 218 2 |
|
N atom-protonated tetramer |
-1586.629 411 9 |
|
N atom-protonated hexamer |
-2379.748 630 8 |
|
N atom-protonated octamer |
-3172.870 048 7 |
|
supramolecular structure |
description |
hydrogen bonds |
rel energy (kcal/mol) |
|
1 |
protonated octamer |
8 COOH/COOH + 8 NH2/OH |
0 |
|
2 |
tetramer + N-atom protonated tetramer |
8 COOH/COOH + 8 NH2/OH |
12.2 |
|
3 |
dimer + N-atom protonated hexamer |
8 COOH/COOH + 8 NH2/OH |
12.6 |
|
4 |
3 Dimers + N-atom protonated Dimer |
8 COOH/COOH |
53.4 |